IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Mon, 12 September 2011 11:30 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6B3721F8B05 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.194
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.194 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.929, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1QKlOF0HHGu5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.suchdamage.org (permutation-city.suchdamage.org [69.25.196.28]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AF5E21F8B01 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 04:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (ma12436d0.tmodns.net [208.54.36.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.suchdamage.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C7DC201B1; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 07:34:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 0A51C42B7; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 07:32:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Subject: Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
References: <20110728121904.2D22AD7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <4E5D4570.9080108@piuha.net> <85BEBBFE35549CAF8000DCE9@PST.JCK.COM> <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C349D75F42@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <197BAAF4-B98F-4C7C-BC48-E311869CFE28@network-heretics.com> <4E615925.1060506@piuha.net> <01O5L1H6RLZ600RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <tslwrdgtaxy.fsf@mit.edu> <FEB8CAA5-C447-49FD-AD8C-DF32B2F30361@network-heretics.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 07:32:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: <FEB8CAA5-C447-49FD-AD8C-DF32B2F30361@network-heretics.com> (Keith Moore's message of "Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:34:51 -0400")
Message-ID: <tsl1uvmt2qn.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 11:30:54 -0000

>>>>> "Keith" == Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> writes:

    Keith>     2) This will not do any good


    Keith> IMO, that is a valid objection.  Stability in our process is
    Keith> desirable; therefore change merely for the sake of change is
    Keith> undesirable.

"This will not do any good, stability is important, so this should not
be done," is an objection.  "This will not do any good," is neutral.
You believe that stability is important.  Others believe that forward
progress and being seen to do something are good.  I do tend to come
down on your side, and if I think something isn't going to do do good
I'm likely to actually state an objection. However for a lot of reasons,
I think the IESG should actually require people to present something
that is constructionally supportive or an objection before counting it
as such. "This will not do any good," is not such.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email